- (1.) This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings of criminal complaint case No. 6212 of 2004, Babu Ram v. Chandrabhan and Ors., under Sections 420, 471, 465, 468 and 120-B, I.P.C. police station Mandi Saharanpur district Saharanpur pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur.
(2.) The facts relevant for disposal of this application are that complainant No. 2 Babu Ram son of Prem Singh filed a complaint against the accused applicants and co-accused Chandrabhan, Mustaqeem, Babu Ram son of Buddhu, Padam and Rati Ram under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C with these allegations that complainant Babu Ram and his brother Satish were owners of house bearing municipal No. 11/1273-1/1 situate at mohalla Mehdi Sarai Saharanpur police station Mandi Saharanpur and it was their ancestral property. During the communal riots of 1991-92 the complainant and his brother Satish left that house and started to reside at mohalla Mohit Nagar, Saharanpur due to fear of Muhammadans. On 12.10.1992 accused Chandrabhan, Mustaqeem, Babu Ram, Padam and Rati Ram thatched a conspiracy and they prepared a fictitious power of attorney in the name of the complainant and his brother Satish Kumar by impersonating two other persons as Babu Ram and Satish Kumar and produced them before the Sub Registrar and got that power of attorney registered in favour of accused No. 1 Chandrabhan and on the basis of this fictitious power of attorney in favour of the accused No. 1 Chandrabhan, Mustaqeem accused No. 2 got a sale deed of the aforesaid house of the complainant Babu Ram and Satish Kumar executed in his favour 30.4.1993 for a sum of Rs. 29,000/-. Accused Babu Ram son of Buddhu and Padam had signed the sale deed as marginal witnesses. Thereafter on 13.5.1996 accused No. 2 Mustaqeem sold this house to accused No. 6 Shamshad Begum (applicant No. 2 in this petition) for a sum of Rs. 30,000/- and accused No. 7 Mohd. Daud (applicant No. 1 in this petition) signed the sale deed as a witness. Thereafter the accused got the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. initiated by the police in respect of the said house. However, the City Magistrate has passed order on 16.8.2003 that he has no jurisdiction to decide the question of ownership and dropped the proceedings. Then the complainant and his brother Satish Kumar came to know about the aforesaid fictitious power of attorney. The complainant and his brother are still in possession of the house. Their names were entered as owner of the house in the record of Nagarmahapalika Saharanpur and they are depositing its house tax and water tax. Therefore, it was prayed that action should be taken against the accused persons and a direction should be given to the police to register a case against them.
(3.) The learned Magistrate on the above application instead of issuing any direction to the police to register a case against the accused persons treated it as a complaint and after recording statement of the complainant and his witnesses summoned the accused persons under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120-B, I.P.C., and aggrieved with that order, the accused No. 6 and 7 have filed this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court in which they have alleged that they have bona fide purchased the house from its owner Munstaqeem in whose favour the sale deed had been executed by accused No. 1 Chandrabhan on behalf of the complainant and his brother Satish Kumar. They have not committed any offence. On the other hand, they are victims of the above conspiracy and so the proceedings against them should be dropped.;